W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-desc@w3.org > May 2005

LC75c

From: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 15:45:48 -0700
Message-ID: <32D5845A745BFB429CBDBADA57CD41AF0A3CA5D6@ussjex01.amer.bea.com>
To: "WS-Description WG" <www-ws-desc@w3.org>
My original proposal for setting method on operation is at [1].

 

It has 2 main separable parts: 1) specifying the method on the
operation, and 2) changing the http binding to use the operation method
as the binding operation method.

 

There is one area that we never got to agreement on, which is the token
to use for methods.  I am ok with whatever solution would get WG
consensus.  The options IIRC:

1. The methods are generic, ie CRUD.  The http binding then does a
direct mapping of CRUD to HTTP methods, ie read->HTTP GET, etc.  

2. The methods are http-specific.

 

I think that option #2 is simpler and hits the 80/20 for web
development.  There may be some utility in #1 if the WS-Transfer or
WS-RF folks wanted to "bind" the CRUD operations to WS-Transfer SOAP or
WS-RF operations, potentially as a new binding.  But that hardly seems
like the design point of replacing the safety operation....  

 

I prefer #2 and can live with #1.

 

I believe this is superior to the safety attribute as it currently
stands, and makes web description more efficient.

 

In the case where no http parameters are set in the http binding, it is
interesting to observe that the description of services could be further
simplified by allowing an endpoint to refer to an interface with an http
method rather than a binding.  

 

Cheers,

Dave

 

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2004Jul/0060.html

 
Received on Friday, 27 May 2005 22:45:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:36 GMT